Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next steps
<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Wed, 31 July 2019 14:06 UTC
Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
X-Original-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 532CD120018 for <loops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 07:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YHeycXm44wT0 for <loops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 07:06:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.orange.com (relais-inet.orange.com [80.12.70.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E532F12000E for <loops@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 07:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfednr03.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.67]) by opfednr23.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 45zFZr1Gytz5vQd; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:06:12 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme6.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.13.67]) by opfednr03.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 45zFZr16dpzDq80; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:06:12 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::e878:bd0:c89e:5b42]) by OPEXCAUBM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:06:11 +0200
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Marie-Jose Montpetit <marie@mjmontpetit.com>, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
CC: Suresh Krishnan <suresh@kaloom.com>, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>, "loops@ietf.org" <loops@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next steps
Thread-Index: AQHVR6iWG5o9/Vm4nkqLC/HSohgY7abkwoQg
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 14:06:10 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330312ECFCF@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <CAKKJt-eRGJe+9PtEC7xgFz+HA0zsr_sR0NUgKRmJ-P5Q3XBg-A@mail.gmail.com> <CAPjWiCSbPioTHkYBpX73qxzO=H1sJDZpCMCKzBKoU4rZLLhwMQ@mail.gmail.com> <E6659E42-D6D7-4033-B4D6-9305823063D2@tzi.org> <CAKKJt-c24RdPyZRoK-B6fXuN0xABUsU=p7Y6UFwAcENfjE3oOQ@mail.gmail.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330312ECCEB@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <CAPjWiCTo+TjgJ97TTyY3yF=9BAiEyqnyDNbaHjXdqzW5h3JjAw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPjWiCTo+TjgJ97TTyY3yF=9BAiEyqnyDNbaHjXdqzW5h3JjAw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.114.13.247]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330312ECFCFOPEXCAUBMA2corp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/loops/Ms3YELD9CZN0tfew-SFy4oZOQFM>
Subject: Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next steps
X-BeenThere: loops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Local Optimizations on Path Segments <loops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/loops>, <mailto:loops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/loops/>
List-Post: <mailto:loops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:loops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/loops>, <mailto:loops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 14:06:17 -0000
Re-, Local recovery/local measurement isn’t specific enough? Cheers, Med De : Marie-Jose Montpetit [mailto:marie@mjmontpetit.com] Envoyé : mercredi 31 juillet 2019 16:02 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed TGI/OLN; Spencer Dawkins at IETF Cc : Suresh Krishnan; Magnus Westerlund; Mirja Kuehlewind; loops@ietf.org Objet : Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next steps This is a very wide scope that covers many existing groups. Can you focus on a narrower scope? Marie-José Montpetit, Ph.D. Research Affiliate, MIT Media Laboratory mariejose@mjmontpetit.com<mailto:mariejose@mjmontpetit.com> mariejo@mit.edu<mailto:mariejo@mit.edu> On July 31, 2019 at 9:55:37 AM, mohamed.boucadair@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> (mohamed.boucadair@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>) wrote: Hi Spencer, all, I would restrict the host-to-network interaction to the minimum (read ECN) in the initial scope of the this proposed work. FWIW, below a tentative scope we included in the use-cases I-D: ========= investigate to what extent a network-assisted approach can contribute to increase the overall perceived quality of experience in specific situations (e.g., Sections 3.5<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-tsvwg-loops-problem-opportunities-03#section-3.5> and 3.6<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-tsvwg-loops-problem-opportunities-03#section-3.6> of [RFC8517<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8517>]) without requiring access to internal transport primitives. The rationale beneath this approach is that some information (loss detection, better visibility on available paths and their characteristics, etc.) can be used to trigger local actions while avoiding as much as possible undesired side effects (e.g., expose a behavior that would be interpreted by an endpoint as an anomaly (corrupt data) and which would lead to exacerbate end-to-end recovery. Such local actions would have a faster effect (e.g., faster recovery, used multiple paths simultaneously). To that aim, the work is structured into two (2) phased stages: o Stage 1: Network-assisted optimization. This one assumes that optimizations (e.g., support latency-sensitive applications) can be implemented at the network without requiring defining new interaction with the endpoint. Existing tools such as ECN will be used. Some of these optimizations may be valuable in deployments where communications are established over paths that are not exposing the same performance characteristics. o Stage 2: Collaborative networking optimization. This one requires more interaction between the network and an endpoint to implement coordinated and more surgical network-assisted optimizations based on information/instructions shared by an endpoint or sharing locally-visible information with endpoint for better and faster recovery. Effort related to the second stage is out of scope of the initial planned work. Nevertheless, future work will be planned once progress is (hopefully) made on the first stage. ===== Cheers, Med De : LOOPS [mailto:loops-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:loops-bounces@ietf.org>] De la part de Spencer Dawkins at IETF Envoyé : jeudi 25 juillet 2019 20:59 À : Carsten Bormann Cc : Magnus Westerlund; Marie-Jose Montpetit; Mirja Kuehlewind; loops@ietf.org<mailto:loops@ietf.org>; Suresh Krishnan Objet : Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next steps Still wearing no hats, because I no longer have any dots ... On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 12:56 AM Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org<mailto:cabo@tzi.org>> wrote: On Jul 24, 2019, at 18:17, Marie-Jose Montpetit <marie@mjmontpetit.com<mailto:marie@mjmontpetit.com>> wrote: > > Standardisation of what? The architecture? The protocols (beware there is already FECFRAME and others)? The proxies? Hi Marie-José, details of the thinking that was developed in the side meetings that happened at the previous two IETF meetings can be found at https://github.com/loops-wg/charter The BOF actually added one piece of information I didn’t previously perceive that way: People seem to really want to tackle the host-to-node case (as needed, e.g., for going through WiFi access clouds) right away, not just the in-network (node-to-node) case. That would be the one thing I would change based on my recollection of the BOF. But of course there may be other things; it may be worth to now have another round of discussion of the proposed charter. Communication is good, but one thing I mentioned in my summary of my chat with the ADs was * Here's a hint from the ADs - if the proponents can come up with a clear charter, limited in scope, that will make their lives easier, and make it easier for them to charter this work :D So, it's reasonable for the LOOPS community to consider adding host-to-node, but it's worth checking whether this would expand the scope of the requested charter, and whether excluding host-to-node makes the initial work easier to complete. My impression, and Magnus might say I'm insane, was that Magnus is right on the edge of whether this work can be chartered without a second, working group-forming BOF. If the LOOPS community can't live without host-to-node, the community should add it. If the community can make use of LOOPS without host-to-node and add it later, the community might consider whether that reduces the scope of the initial proposed charter enough to help Magnus approve it :-) Best wishes, Spencer -- LOOPS mailing list LOOPS@ietf.org<mailto:LOOPS@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/loops
- [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next steps Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Michael Welzl
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Liyizhou
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Emmanuel Lochin
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Wesley Eddy
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Wesley Eddy
- Re: [LOOPS] [nwcrg] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOO… Stuart William Card
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Michael Welzl
- Re: [LOOPS] [nwcrg] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOO… Colin Perkins
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Wesley Eddy
- Re: [LOOPS] [nwcrg] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOO… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [LOOPS] [nwcrg] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOO… Colin Perkins
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Michael Welzl
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Colin Perkins
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Colin Perkins
- Re: [LOOPS] BOF co-chairs thinking on LOOPS next … Marie-Jose Montpetit